Political Elites’ Program of Austerity Set the Stage for Brexit

Scapegoating immigrants for economic suffering is easier than confronting the politicians that crafted austerity policy.

June 24, 2016

Leave supporters hold signs on Westminster Bridge in London on June 15, 2016. (Rex Features via AP Images)

Want to Fight Back?

Sign up for Take Action Now and get three actions in your inbox every Tuesday.

Thank you for signing up. For more from The Nation, check out our latest issue.

Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month!

Support Progressive Journalism

The Nation is reader supported: Chip in $10 or more to help us continue to write about the issues that matter.

Fight Back!

Sign up for Take Action Now and we’ll send you three meaningful actions you can each week.

Travel With The Nation

Be the first to hear about Nation Travels destinations, and explore the world with kindred spirits.

Sign up for our Wine Club today.

Did you know you can support The Nation by drinking wine?

At 4 am, following the UK referendum on EU membership, Nigel Farage, the leader of the Eurosceptic UK Independence Party, gave a tentative victory speech. Bullish and beaming, but couching his cheer in caveats that not all areas had declared results, flanked by young men in suits jeering and pogoing, Farage announced that if the Leave campaign had won, “We will have done so without a single bullet being fired.”

This isn’t quite true. One week earlier, the pro-EU Labour Party MP Jo Cox was shot and stabbed to death in her constituency, by Thomas Mair, a local man with links to far-right groups including the English Defence League and the pro-Apartheid Springbok Society. Several days after her murder, her husband, Brendan Cox told reporters, “She was a politician and she had very strong political views and I believe she was killed because of those views.”

The EU referendum became a conduit for anger on many issues: immigration, economic inequalities, London’s disproportionate economic boom, and disenfranchisement by an aloof political elite, an elite that after the vote appears shaken. At 8:30 am, David Cameron announced his resignation. The speed of his resignation threw prominent Leave campaigners into disarray: Former London mayor Boris Johnson was busy arguing that Article 50, which triggers the mechanism for a country to leave the EU, didn’t have to be invoked immediately. The swift resignation of the prime minister signaled that Conservatives were happy for the Leave campaigners to be forced to confront the consequences of their wishes as soon as possible.

For the left, the outcome will prompt much soul-searching. The Labour party could use this opportunity to shore up support and lead a progressive fight for the best possible trade and migration terms. Instead, several Labour MPs have put forward a motion to condemn Jeremy Corbyn, dredging up longstanding disgruntlement that has split the party since Corbyn’s surprising victory last year.

Throughout the campaign, polls showed a close battle, with both sides expecting a paper-thin victory at various points. Politicians and commentators spoke of a divided Britain: one of young “metropolitan elites” in cities voting to remain, in contrast to older ordinary voters in smaller towns still weathered by the recession and angered by the free movement EU membership allowed. The reality, as it has an irritating tendency to be, is more complex: Voters were more divided more by educational level, social class, and income than by age. But the votes were also geographically divided: Some large cities such as Sheffield and Birmingham voted to Leave, while London had some of the highest rates of Remain voters. More interesting is the fact that Scotland voted unanimously to Remain and Northern Ireland was overwhelmingly pro-EU, while Wales predominantly backed the Brexit option.

4

5

So voters are divided, but now countries are too. Both Scottish and Northern Irish politicians have stated they will seek to vote on splitting from Britain, Northern Ireland’s Sinn Fein calling for reunification with the Republic of Ireland, and Scotland considering another independence referendum after 2014’s rejected vote. The ramifications for peace in Northern Ireland are at stake, but if Scotland alone secedes, the future face of Britain will change markedly, with little prospect for a Labour majority, which depends on heavily today on Scottish voters.

Conservatives wanted the vote before summer newspapers fill with photographs of refugees being rescued from dinghies.

On the face of it, the vote was less about EU membership, despite arguments couched vaguely around sovereignty, and more a referendum on immigration: The Leave campaign’s slogan “Take Back Control” vaguely centered on law-making powers with the implicit but often explicit message that control pertained to borders. Free movement in the EU became a bogeyman: The Conservatives were keen to force the vote before the summer when newspapers fill with photographs of desperate refugees being rescued from flimsy dinghies, ramping up rhetoric that the EU is being “swamped” by people fleeing their country of origin. Across the Channel in Calais, the migrant camp has rarely been out of the headlines, with migrants doggedly trying to enter the UK to claim asylum.

Many of the areas that voted to leave the EU actually have low migrant populations, but share a sharp rise in poverty over the past decade. After the recession, the UK economy has precariously recovered, but recovery is geographically tilted toward London. In the capital, house prices have risen massively, and wages are far beyond the average seen elsewhere in the country. Outside of London, jobs have been lost, wages depressed, and public services cut massively. Since 2010, the Conservatives’ austerity measures have slashed funding for the NHS, welfare spending, and budgets for social and public services: The keener the deprivation in an area, the higher the cuts, proportionally. So the poorest have borne the brunt of austerity, and had little left to lose. Warnings that the UK faced economic ruin if it voted to leave, borne out by sterling’s collapse to its lowest point since 1985 today, had little effect on communities that already feel excluded from the reported growth in other parts of the EU.

Many of the areas that voted to leave the EU actually have low migrant populations but share a sharp rise in poverty.

Toward the end of the campaign, both sides began to address this angle—those expressing what often amounted to racist views were described as having “legitimate concerns,” a hackneyed and euphemistic phrase that caught on quickly, but did not address the scapegoating of migrants. Switching the scapegoat from the government to the faceless migrant, whether from Syria or Poland, is easier when people are scared for their livelihood, and more convenient for the politicians campaigning on both sides.

In a country racked by inequality, fear is easy to capitalize on. But as well as being afraid, people feel disenfranchised—and they are. Both Labour and the Conservatives have for decades withdrawn into themselves, creating a political class that is drawn predominantly from a homogeneous and elite tranche of society, wealthy and socially removed from the constituents they represent. Many politicians attended the same university, Oxford, and even studied the same course—Politics, Philosophy and Economics. The media are much the same. It’s easy then to believe the establishment is a stitch-up designed to perpetuate inequality and keep an eye out only for themselves. Recent paranoia about media outlets, including the BBC, indulging in “blackouts” of protests reflects this fear. And during polling hours, a conspiracy theory circulated that pencils were issued in polling stations to allow government bodies to erase votes, with people on social media encouraging voters to bring pens.

This alienation, coupled with the opportunity to kick back at the establishment, led to a seismic vote to withdraw from the European project. For the left to win back lost voters, the root causes of this paranoia and ennui have to be addressed, and that requires a committed anti-austerity movement that can properly challenge the current consensus, rather than bow to it. But at this point, it might be too late to fully repair the wounds inflicted by years of economic deprivation, and the withdrawal from the EU that has now been triggered.

Dawn FosterTwitterDawn Foster is a London-based writer on politics, social affairs and economics, and the author of Lean Out (2016, Repeater).

" the withdrawal from the EU that has now been triggered" These are the last words of your article. However, the Brexit referendum as written is not binding on Parliament. It seems that the 'Brexit' can only happen if Parliament elects to activate Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty at which point the 'Brexit' would be irrevocable and irreversible and will take about 2 years to take effect. Furthermore when Prime Minister Cameron announced that he will resign in October and that he would leave the activation of Article 50 to his successor he may have created a situation in which the Brexit may never happen. Read this from the Independent in London: "As the dust settles on the EU referendum battleground, some 33 million voters await with bated breath to see what the victors will do now that the nation has spoken to leave.

Political commentators forecast a dark future for the UK: Jeremy Corbyn has just sacked Hilary Benn to head off a coup, and Boris Johnson could be prime minister come November.

David Cameron’s decision to resign before enacting Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty, which sets out how a country could leave the EU, may have much bigger implications for Conservative hopefuls eyeing up the Prime Minister's seat than they bargained for.

While panic ensues, one person’s musings in the comments section of the Guardian has an interesting hypothesis on these complications:

If Boris Johnson looked downbeat yesterday, that is because he realises that he has lost.

Perhaps many Brexiters do not realise it yet, but they have actually lost, and it is all down to one man: David Cameron.

With one fell swoop yesterday at 9:15 am, Cameron effectively annulled the referendum result, and simultaneously destroyed the political careers of Boris Johnson, Michael Gove and leading Brexiters who cost him so much anguish, not to mention his premiership.

How?

Throughout the campaign, Cameron had repeatedly said that a vote for leave would lead to triggering Article 50 straight away. Whether implicitly or explicitly, the image was clear: he would be giving that notice under Article 50 the morning after a vote to leave. Whether that was scaremongering or not is a bit moot now but, in the midst of the sentimental nautical references of his speech yesterday, he quietly abandoned that position and handed the responsibility over to his successor.

And as the day wore on, the enormity of that step started to sink in: the markets, Sterling, Scotland, the Irish border, the Gibraltar border, the frontier at Calais, the need to continue compliance with all EU regulations for a free market, re-issuing passports, Brits abroad, EU citizens in Britain, the mountain of legislation to be torn up and rewritten ... the list grew and grew.

The referendum result is not binding. It is advisory. Parliament is not bound to commit itself in that same direction.

The Conservative party election that Cameron triggered will now have one question looming over it: will you, if elected as party leader, trigger the notice under Article 50?

Who will want to have the responsibility of all those ramifications and consequences on his/her head and shoulders?

Boris Johnson knew this yesterday, when he emerged subdued from his home and was even more subdued at the press conference. He has been out-manoeuvred and check-mated.

If he runs for leadership of the party, and then fails to follow through on triggering Article 50, then he is finished. If he does not run and effectively abandons the field, then he is finished. If he runs, wins and pulls the UK out of the EU, then it will all be over - Scotland will break away, there will be upheaval in Ireland, a recession ... broken trade agreements. Then he is also finished. Boris Johnson knows all of this. When he acts like the dumb blond it is just that: an act.

The Brexit leaders now have a result that they cannot use. For them, leadership of the Tory party has become a poison chalice.

When Boris Johnson said there was no need to trigger Article 50 straight away, what he really meant to say was "never". When Michael Gove went on and on about "informal negotiations" ... why? why not the formal ones straight away? ... he also meant not triggering the formal departure. They both know what a formal demarche would mean: an irreversible step that neither of them is prepared to take.

All that remains is for someone to have the guts to stand up and say that Brexit is unachievable in reality without an enormous amount of pain and destruction, that cannot be borne. And David Cameron has put the onus of making that statement on the heads of the people who led the Brexit campaign."

(11)(1)

James Scaminaci Iiisays:

June 27, 2016 at 12:18 am

Comment at least as good, if not better than the article. Bravo.

(6)(0)

Steve Muratoresays:

June 25, 2016 at 4:56 am

Isn't it ironic, the parallel with the current political climate in the US that is, that Trump has capitalized on widespread displeasure with economic elites that has been increasingly pervasive among GOP primary voters AND that he has also scapegoated immigrants.

You can bet the farm that despite the obvious image problems Trump has among politically sophisticated people in the US, no amount of money Hillary can muster for ads to demonize him will make her at all attractive to those voters. Make no mistake, I will not vote for Trump. But I can't help but see the tragedy on the American horizon.

The DNC has grossly miscalculated. We are now one month away from it being to late to jettison her sorry campaign.

The solution is Bernie Sanders. Flame away.

(43)(7)

Francis Louis Szotsays:

June 25, 2016 at 3:51 am

If the “Brexit” is such a “historical” event with global effects, why is it that the USA media hardly mentioned the existence of this critical election, except for a flurry of intense hand wringing during the week leading up to the watershed date?

We are in the continual situation of a news black-out of MANY MORE events of International importance. To falsely fill the void of “hard news”, we are saturated with the “reality show” spectacle and “horse race” reporting of the Presidential candidates, which is constant and endless.

This is a strategic decision by the Owners of our “capitalist” political and media industries, purposely designed to keep people ignorant about many vital issues, and to maintain the dependance of politicians upon the systematic bribery required to participate in the commercialized race for political Office.

(28)(0)

Jan Querdibittysays:

June 25, 2016 at 11:38 am

If you want world news watch BBC or RT or France 24.

(7)(1)

Wesley Deckersays:

June 24, 2016 at 6:20 pm

A recent IMF article clarified the technical term for austerity is fiscal consolidation, recognizing it's one of a number of policies which compose “the neoliberal agenda—a label used more by critics than by the architects of the policies–[which] rests on two planks. The first is increased competition... [and] the second is a smaller role for the state.” If the lid on the pressure cooker is being screwed down and even politicians can do little about it, no wonder people are afraid. A move like Brexit, destabilizing international alliances, could be seen as a serious consequence of policy determined by the international monetary system – more so than politicians who've seen their role diminished.

(17)(1)

Geraldine Maysays:

June 24, 2016 at 5:59 pm

The reasons given here for Brexit are the very same reasons many Americans will never vote for the Republican, corporate candidate Clinton. They are quite finished with the establishment that always exploits them after stealing their votes to ensure a continuation of the status quo regime.

(40)(5)

Steve Muratoresays:

June 25, 2016 at 4:58 am

Truth!

(9)(5)

Bruce Stenmansays:

June 24, 2016 at 1:39 pm

It is good to see the working people of the UK finally becoming aware of how badly they have been exploited by the neoliberals, starting with Thatcher. It does parallel the working class in the USA opposing the establishment candidates of both parties so vociferously. It is the bankers and finance communities that have moved wealth and income upstream to the elites and left both nations so impoverished in every way shape and form. When the elites live on average 15 years longer than the working class it shows how great a negative impact their thievery has had on the lives of current and future generations.

(59)(1)

Bill Meyersonsays:

June 24, 2016 at 11:17 am

I have a question rather than a comment. Why couldn't Labour's left leaders-- Corbyn etc. wage a successful campaign against austerity, the real cause of Britain's crisis, as was done in Scotland?

(50)(2)

Harriet Thurstlicsays:

June 24, 2016 at 10:23 am

US politicians should read this as a cautionary tale. Ms Foster's report reveals alarming similarities between the discontented populace in England and in the US

(71)(1)

J W Harrodsays:

June 24, 2016 at 10:01 am

Dawn Foster has been in London/England too long and has absorbed the hysteria and misinformation which prevailed in the campaign. For example the Sterling/EU rate was lower after the crash in 2009 than it is now - so the much quoted 1985 figure is just exaggeration. Then to imply that 15 million voters were somehow linked to the extreme right is unacceptable and more outrageous in the same piece is to bring in the death of an MP at the hands of a right wing fanatic. Unregulated and inhumane emigration as in the EU does create problems for all the low paid whether migrants or residents. Go to progressives for Brexit and see many of the arguments which the Nation should and does consider for leaving a corporate- dominated, neo-liberal and increasingly imperial organisation.

(33)(25)

Margaret Rinaldisays:

June 24, 2016 at 9:58 am

I agree w your premise--- I vigorously disagree w the results of the referendum. I think it is a tragedy of unseen proportion. Having lived in the EU for many years and continue to do so on and off-- I was not a supporter of the EU as the currency shifted etc. it seemed to me it was an arrangement by politicians to shove their ideas down people's throats. That said, the world has grown smaller and nationalistic tendencies which are a response to the realities of an interconnected world, serve only the few who simply do not know how to get along for the greater good. When Marie Le Pen is praising the Brexit you know trouble is brewing.

(38)(13)

Steve Muratoresays:

June 25, 2016 at 5:00 am

"I vigorously disagree w the results of the referendum."

So what? Yeah, it may be a tragedy of unseen proportion, but the people of the UK have spoken.

The people of the US are just as pissed. Neoliberalism is dead.

(9)(4)

John Dorchsays:

June 24, 2016 at 9:57 am

" voters were more divided more by educational level, social class and income than by age." I found this comment to be particularly germane to the US political position. Here, the right wing (monied interests, corporations, wall street, evangelicals, gun nuts, the 1%) have done a masterful job of diversion. Instead of blaming the business class coalition (with evangelicals, racists, gun nuts) , they have manged to hoodwink a good portion of the electorate to blame their economic problems on government. Recall Reagan's famous saying about government being the problem (not the business class extracting money from the rest of the population). Allying themselves with racist populism, xenophobia, economic fear, the right has successfully hoodwinked the republican majority.
So what is the business class's end game??? I believe it is a return to feudalism, where the 1% has all the money and all the power, and everybody else are merely serfs. And if Trump wins, that is exactly where we are headed.

(99)(3)

Robin Starlingsays:

June 27, 2016 at 4:19 pm

I think we are headed there whether you vote for Trump or Hillary. The economic outcome will be devastating for the 99%, although maybe quicker down the hole with Trump.

(1)(0)

Barron Mcconnachiesays:

June 24, 2016 at 9:55 am

Well said, here in Canada our far left New Democratic Party lost our recent election after promising balanced budgets thinking going more right was the answer. The Liberal party won out promising to go into debt to build infrastructure and create jobs. But now they are leaning to sign on to the Trans Pacific Partnership, an agreement placing corporations over citizenry, the very cancer that killed the "Remain" side. The rise of Bernie Sanders and even Donald Trump for that matter are both a reflection of the fear and anger from those at the bottom end of the economic spectrum. Let's hope this wake up call falls on more ears and allow democracy to flourish once again. Don't be surprised to see the EU take its boot off the throat of Greece in light of what just happened in Great Britain.

(60)(1)

Bruce Rosensays:

June 24, 2016 at 9:53 am

Look behind the curtain. Hasn't the man from Oz, Rupert Murdoch, significantly stirred the pot on both sides "Anglo-Saxon" sides of the Atlantic?

(30)(0)

Steve Muratoresays:

June 25, 2016 at 5:02 am

So what if he has... realizing that he has won't magically make the people of the United States fall in love with neoliberalism.

(0)(4)

Carolyn Herzsays:

June 24, 2016 at 9:52 am

This analysis sounds remarkably like the situation in the United States. That is why Bernie Sanders' message is so important. It is so easy to blame immigrants for UK or US problems, but that doesn't solve anything. And as described in this article, the Brexit vote sounds almost passive-aggressive. It is much harder to work for real political change, but that it what we must do.

(57)(2)

Edward M Protassays:

June 24, 2016 at 9:36 am

The fault lies with the establishment/corporate media. The public is not kept well-informed - they/we are fed lies and fear tactics, and manipulated to the point of utter frustration leading to revolt. But as Lincoln said, ".. you can't fool all of the people all of the time". Donald Trump is the American symptom of Brexit.

(39)(0)

Patrick Burkesays:

June 24, 2016 at 9:35 am

So does this make Trump the Prime Minister of the UK?

(6)(2)

Steve Muratoresays:

June 25, 2016 at 5:04 am

No, but it does raise the likelihood that he will become POTUS if the DNC nominates Hillary.

(7)(3)

Doug Barrsays:

June 24, 2016 at 8:54 am

"The root cause[] of this paranoia and ennui [and] economic deprivation" and environmental degradation and so on... is our vertical economy. Only by razing it can we extract the root. Perhaps this vote will be the start. http://thelastwhy.ca/poems/2012/12/13/economy.html